Wednesday, August 25, 2010

A Commentary on James Madison, and his belief in Limited Government and State's Rights

"Every person seems to acknowledge his greatness. He blends together the profound politician with the scholar." --William Pierce, on James Madison, 1787

By Douglas V. Gibbs

When the Federalists demanded a more centralized government than the one under the Articles of Confederation, James Madison was one to agree. He recognized the need for a federal government to protect, preserve and promote the union. A unified military needed to exist, and the power of taxation must accompany such need in order to pay for the national defense of the new nation. The federal government, beyond its authorities for the union, however, needed to be restrained, and limited, in Madison's view. Born from these ideas, his framework for the Constitution was followed as a road map to the final document. For this, Madison is considered the father of the U.S. Constitution.

When the Constitution had completed its journey toward completion, the anti-federalists, specifically those in the State of New York, feared the new federal government, afraid it might have the potential to be as tyrannical as the British Government the colonists had just fought against for independence. As a result, New York was seen as one of the States that may not ratify the new Constitution. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay worked passionately to make a case for the Constitution to the New Yorkers, and the other States, that feared ratifying the US Constitution. The Federalist Papers are 85 essays, and are an important source for understanding the U.S. Constitution.

Less known are Madison's notes on the Constitutional Convention. James Madison took meticulous notes, and in his notes on the Constitutional Convention are the arguments that took place that ultimately created the founding document.

James Madison was a constant proponent of limiting the powers of the federal government, as the Constitution was designed to do. He understood that to trample on the State's Rights, and to allow the federal government too many powers, would ultimately stamp out liberty, and allow an expanding federal government to become a tyranny.

In Federalist 10, Madison argued that one of the virtues of the Constitution is that the federal government should be so limited in power, the battles over issues not pertaining to the union (therefore not given to the federal government as an authority) ought to be fought in the States. If people were truly passionate about their particular issue, they could work to affect their State government to that end. If the majority in the State did not see it the same way, the person would then be free to live under that law as it stood in the State (and of course continue to work to change it if they so desire), or vote with his feet by moving to a state that reflected his values. Hence, the way to protect freedom was through the sovereignty of the States.

After all, the Tenth Amendment authored by Madison is clear.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The fear of central authority was paramount, and the need for the Tenth Amendment as an explicit guarantee that the states should retain control over their internal affairs became apparent.

Madison believed that the republic must be governed by the rule of law and limits on the federal government. The law of the land is the U.S. Constitution, and adherence to the text of that document is necessary for individuals to enjoy a high level of freedom on a state and local level. Madison believed this would not only make our nation more prosperous and financially sound, but also would continue throughout the generations to allow the citizens of the United States of America to enjoy the blessings of liberty.

...

Fair Use

~FAIR USE~ Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site/blog for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

However, if you still believe your copyright has been violated, we accept notifications of alleged copyright violations in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Note that if you materially misrepresent a claim of copyright infringement you will be liable for damages (including costsand attorney fees). We require the following information in order to respond to your request: Describe in detail the copyrighted work that you believe has been infringed upon (for example, “The copyrighted work is the code that appearson http://www.example.com/thecode.html") Identify the material that you claim is infringing the copyrighted work listed in #1. Include relevant URL’s that will allow us to identify the work. Your address, telephone number,and email address. Include the following statement “I have a good faith belief that use of the copyrighted materials described above as allegedly infringing is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.” Include thefollowing statement “I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.” Sign the notification, type your full name, sign it electronicallyif submitted via email. Send the notification to douglasvgibbs@yahoo.com. Please place in the subject line Political Pistachio Copyright Infringement.

You can also Email me to bitch and complain if you so desire, as well. In the event that you are offended by my site please advise me of the offensive material by Email, and I will promptly print the Email, and then place it in my shredder to serve as kindling for my fireplace.